click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20110701
20110731
STATION
CSPAN 9
CSPAN2 3
CNN 2
CNNW 2
KQED (PBS) 2
KRCB (PBS) 1
MSNBC 1
MSNBCW 1
WETA 1
WMPT (PBS) 1
LANGUAGE
English 27
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)
contract in afghanistan that moves more than 70% of the goods and materiel that u.s. troops need at their remote fire bases, moves it all across afghanistan. the military in kabul looked at this $2 billion plus contract and found payoffs and corruption. one u.s. official telling us, and we quote from what he explained to us, that when they looked at it there were concerns about, quote, fraudulent paperwork and behavior, indications dollars were flowing to criminals and the enemy. what we are talking about is a web of payoffs. the contractors who run the trucking companies, hire subcontractors, the subcontractors then pay or police and security officials who pay off the taliban or criminals so that their trucks get safe passage across insurgent zones in afghanistan. is it realistic at this point that any of this will ever change. we spoke to a top analyst about this. >> when you have the, you know, extent of corruption that we may have seen with some of these contracts, that's clearly not acceptable and they have to change the way they are doing business, but, you know, like i sai
, that's clear, isn't it? so there he was, he was making his 15th trip to afghanistan and it was while he was over at camp leatherneck that the marines asked him, okay, if there are a bunch of pentagon cuts, how is that going to affect our equipment and stuff like that. and wherever he has gone so far during this particular swing through the country of afghanistan, the troops are saying are we going to get paid? and he's saying, i don't know. just know this whatever you are owed you'll get paid eventually. you know, and this is how this works down. if we do, talking about if we go into a debt ceiling where we can't pay our bills technically which i don't agree with anyway, let's say, the president has the tablt to decide who gets paid when. clearly the debt is going to get paid first. china and saudi arabia are paid before our military, as bad as that sounds, that has to happen, so our borrowing costs don't go through the roof and then pay the military and social security, and if you dodonn tt order, give the department of education money first, it's the president's fault. it's not congre
, reduced spending on the wars in afghanistan and iraq and through targeted cuts to mandatory spending. it doesn't raise taxes and it doesn't touch medicare, medicaid or social security. again, this is not a perfect plan. i have been on the floor many times in favor of a balanced package that includes cuts to spending, domestic, defense and mandatory, but also includes increased revenues. the reid princess plan doesn't e those goals -- the reid plan doesn't achieve those goals but i hope we will get there eventually. this is not a proposal i would have written, but i'm one of more than 100 members of the senate and more than 535 members of congress, and i don't get everything i want. none of us here in congress get everything we want. that's the nature of compromise. that's the nature of democracy, and that's why the framers of the constitution created checks and balances in government. that's why they created two chambers in congress and three branches of government, and when you're a leader in government, you just don't have the luxury of drawing a line in the sand and walking away.
drawing down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of the plan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the war is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trillion. and another thing that's scored in that, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way mr. reid scored that, which is ph
afghanistan, prior to 9/11. how do we best deal with this threat, sir? >> well, i think, you know, two things, one is we have to really learn to be vigilant here at home, the good news is that the homegrown guys are less likely to use chemical or nuclear weapons and just like we saw in norway, you can have one crazy person with a gun, kill almost 100 people and, so, we have to be vigilant here at home and second thing, we have to work better at putting pressure on the regimes overseas and ungoverned territories, al-shabab and followers have essentially taken over half of somalia and the rest of it is falling apart and millions are starving and we have piracy issues and other security issues and there are ties to yemen and the al qaeda leadership there and the other thing we need to do is work closely with our allies in trying to figure out as we pull down in iraq and afghanistan, how are we going to keep the pressure on in places like yemen and afghanistan and somalia. bill: okay. mike, thank you. you know, we talked a lot about the u.s. threat but the canadians are dealing with something sim
the winding down of military operations in iraq and afghanistan. and, it would give the government an additional $2.7 trillion in borrowing authority to last through 2012. the top republican in the senate mitch mcconnell said democrats were playing with fire by opposing the boehner plan. >> it's inconceivable to me that they would actually block the only bill that could get through the house of representatives and prevent a default right now. it's inconceivable to me that they would do this for no other reason than to help the president avoid another debate before the election about the need for washington to get its fiscal house in order. >> reporter: those words were echoed by many house republicans who took to the floor this afternoon. >> what needs to be done today-- if you owe debts, pay debts. but we also owe a debt to this generation struggling and the next that we can only repay through fiscal reform. >> reporter: house democrats, such as jim mcgovern of massachusetts, had a very different take on the plan. >> i keep expecting lion tamers and acrobats to appear on the house
-- the other factor is that we are now drawing down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of the plan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the war is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trillion. and another thing that's scored in that, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way
misspent in iraq and afghanistan over a 10-year period. the "wall street journal" reporting they include $300 million for u.s. agency, agricultural development project with a "burn rate" of million dollars a day that paid afghan farmers to work in their own field, it covers subcontractors in eastern afghanistan, paying 20% of the contract to insurgents for protection and touches on cases where host government was unable to sustain a project like costly water treatment plant in iraq that produced murky water and lacked power and construction of afghan military economy that would cost $40 million to operate and maintain, far beyond what the afghan government could afford. 75% of the total contract dollars spent to support operations in iraq and afghanistan have gone to just 23 major contractors. the federal work force assigned to oversee the contracts hasn't grown in parallel with the massive growth of wartime expenditures. read more about that in the "wall street journal" this morning. one more tweet, if i can, just to finish off the discussion. adding this from darrell price, saying: an
're at war for 10 years, in afghanistan and iraq at surge levels. we assume we're going to be fighting this war for 10 more years, with over 100,000 troops in afghanistan and oh, gosh, wait, we're going to withdraw our troops in 2014. $1 trillion in savings. i've got a better idea. let's pass a bill to cover the moon with yogurt that will cost $5 trillion today. and then let's pass a bill the next day to cancel that bill. we could save $5 trillion. wait, i've got a better idea. our debt is $14 trillion. let's come up with a new plan to spend $14 trillion, then rescind it the next day and let's save $14 trillion. this stuff is fiscal fantasy. you can't make this stuff up, mr. speaker. suggesting that we're going to be in a war at these levels for 10 more years when everybody knows we've already decided not to do that, that does not get us $1.3 trillion in spending cuts. only in washington can you add up math like that. we need real spending cuts. i yield myself an additional minute to say, this is getting serious, mr. speaker. very serious. we can't keep spending money we just don't hav
who lost his life when his offspring helicopter tragically went down in afghanistan. and now his family and friends have found a way to honor his life and sacrifice through an annual event that is now used to raise funds for a college scholarship awarded to students at eden prairie high school where randy graduated in 1985. in addition to this scholarship, his run seeks to raise awareness of the contributions of our men and women in uniform that they make every day to keep america free. the major may not live us but his memory lives on through his family and friends and his community and through the scholarships through the local high school students that share his values. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. kucinich: mr. speaker, i ask permission to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. kucinich: as congress struggles to come up with this deal over government debt, we all know that all we had
headlines today, the mayor of kandahar is the second elected official to be assassinated in afghanistan in only two weeks. president car save's half brother was the first. officials say that the mayor was killed today inside a government compound by a suicide bomber. >>> britain has officially recognized libya's main opposition group as the legitimate government. >>> meanwhile in tripoli the convicted lockerbie bomber was spotted in a featured seat at a progadhafi rally. he was released from a scottish prison on so-called compassionate grounds nearly two years ago after his lawyers argued that he was dying of prostate cancer. he's apaurptly still very much with us. 270 people died on pan am flight 103 over scotland more than 22 years ago. >>> and ground zero first responders sufferingç from cancr will not be compensated by the government for their illness. a federal medical team reports there is not enough evidence to show a cause and effect connection linking their cancer directly to their exposure to dust and debris. the finding means as of now they do not qualify for federal benefit
in afghanistan alone to prop up a corrupt and incompetent karzai government. how about ending wasteful subsidies to big agriculture companies? how about asking billionaire hedge fund managers to pay the same tax rates as their secretaries? the truth is that the best way to deal with our long-term fiscal situation is to grow our economy. that means creating jobs and putting people back to work. the last election i thought was about jobs. we haven't talked about jobs at all since the new republican majority became -- came to power. that means investing in things like education and infrastructure and green technology and medical research. that's the kind of economic future the american people deserve. the boehner default plan would take us exactly in the wrong direction and urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to reject it. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from california has 5 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman is recognized. mr. dreier: mr. speaker, as i listen to my friend from the other side
down the cost of our military efforts in afghanistan and iraq. last year we spent a little over $150 billion. this year we'll spend a little over $100 billion. and the plan is to soon be down to at least $50 billion in two or three years. so over the ten-year period there'll be about eight years at nearly $50 billion or so spent on the war instead of $150 billion. that's part of thelan that we've been operating on for a long time. $150 billion for the w is not baseline expenditure of the united states. it was never projected to continue at that level, so hopefully we could bring it below $50 billion. maybe we went get to $50 billion. i don't know. but what is the reasonable estimate? i think the house republicans and the president said it would drop to $50 billion, and that would be the baseline out there for the rest of the time. that's $1 trillion. that's $1 trillion. so you take $1 trillion out of the $2.7 trillion, you're down to $1.7 trlion. and another thing that's scored in tt, since that $1 trillion in war costs is scored the way mr. reid scored that, which is phantom money,
with a situation like 9/11 or the war in iraq or afghanistan are terrorism? what if there is unforeseen event that would force government to spend more money than it takes an? guest: the legislation would have to be written to be including situations when we get like that. i am no expert on the u.s. economy so i want to put that disclaimer out there right now. but we are spending more than we're taking in and it is not sustainable. we cannot continue down this path. when you have the medicare board of trustees coming out in the month of may and releasing a report that says, if medicare is not reformed in 2024, it will be bankrupt, it is irresponsible for washington not to do anything about their when you know you are facing this problem. we need to deal with that. we need to do some entitlement reform across the board. we cannot balance the u.s. budget by cutting discretionary spending. host: i realize that this is still coming together so the information continues to evolve. but based on what we hear this morning, it is a $1.4 trillion increase in the debt limit immediately. based on misinfo
the savings would come from iraq and afghanistan and don't materialize and votes on a balanced budget amendment but what the democrats reviews to do is tie an increase in the debt ceiling to passing the balanced budget amendment. you can see the rough outlines of a deal. any deal would have to go back to the house. would these conservatives especially tea party members that speaker boehner had to make concessions to, what would they do if it comes back monday night just hours before the deadline, would they vote for that? >> 201 votes in favor of this legislation. right now 196. take a look. as of now 12 republicans have bolted from the leadership from john boehner, the speaker, and eric cantor the majority leader and right now 12 republicans have voted against and still not there. 216. there is still plenty of time left. nine minutes plus for this vote to conclude. it's a fascinating development as you say. by the way, we're told john boehner was mulling around and didn't seem overly concerned but it is still not a done deal yet. once this does pass, john, assuming it passes, gets 21
with bills and insurance companies. soldiers, in too many cases returning from iraq and afghanistan, are facing even greater challenges in the working market. i was at youngstown university talking, there are programs there, there's a group through magnet in youngstown in northeast ohio about putting -- getting -- helping soldiers and sailors and marines leaving the service, integrating into the classroom and helping them find jobs in that region, someplace we've fallen woefully short. manufacturing, which was moving along steadily earlier this year, we had seen 12, 13, 14, 15 months of job growth in manufacturing, not enough job growth but some, that's even slowing down. steps taken through the auto rescue and other things we did in the last couple of years dealing with this terrible, terrible recession created in 2007 and 2008 the auto rescue saved millions -- auto rescue and other efforts saved millions of americans from joining the unemployment rolls and we're seeing a better auto industry, an auto industry coming back, especially in places like defiance and toledo and northwood
-in-law in afghanistan and my sister works as physical therapist with a young man who just lost his leg last year in iraq. now if a man can give his legs up for this country, why can't the wealthy give up some of the tax loopholes, spread a little bit of this around. it is unbelievable the fact -- we don't even have to raise taxes on anybody. just make them pay their taxes. a lot of republicans and small businesses pay their taxes but the super rich don't. and i don't think people understand the kind of tax loophole that is are in shelters. host: we're moving on to foster in centerville, georgia, on our line for democrats. go ahead. caller: hi. how are you doing? i'm just wondering now, now we actually elected people to go to congress to balance the budget and pay the bills but do they realize instead of making an amendment, do they already have the authority to pay the bills? host: well now have you let your representative or senator know how you feel about this? caller: we certainly have. me and my girlfriend got together and we got up a sheet with all the republicans representatives. we called all the
wars, afghanistan and iraq. borrowed money to do it. these are past expenditures. here we are, days away from the default crisis, where our republican friends are using this moment in time, where we're not really discussing tomorrow's expenditures, we're talking about yesterday's expenditures and they're saying, give us our way our else america defaults. mr. welch: representative garamendi, i think the message from the democrats in the house of representatives is straightforward and logical. mr. tonko: we said save medicare, make it stronger. then we talk about cutting, cutting programs that don't create jobs. do those cuts where there's no jobs created. where there are, save those programs, strengthen them, provide for jobs by investing in education, in innovation, and in infrastructure. and it's very easy when you take the education investment, the infrastructure investment and certainly the education investment that equals jobs for americans. middle class americans. and that's what it's all about. if we create jobs, it drives down the unemployment factor, drives down the deficit.
Search Results 0 to 26 of about 27 (some duplicates have been removed)